‘Rape’ can be defined as an act commited without consent of the recipient.
For some time I have maintained that Theresa May had no intention of negotiating an exit for the United Kingdom from the European Union that would satisfy both Leave and Remain. Subsequent events showed that she had every intention of having the United Kingdom ‘shackled’ to the European Union for an eternity. What she has achieved is something that neither those that voted to leave, nor those that voted to remain, are happy with. On the other hand, as one who appears content to see our nation become a ‘vassel state’ of the European Union, no doubt she is extremely happy.
The agreement that she has arrived at with the European Union can only be considered as a humiliation of a once great nation. From whatever angle you consider this agreement; and whether that is political or economic, it is the sort of ‘agreement’ that a conquered nation might be forced to accept – but then, whilst many attempts have been made to conquer the United Kingdom in recent centuries not one has succeeded; until now. That this ‘conquest’ has been achieved with the assistance of British politicians makes the ‘pill of defeat’ even more bitter to swallow.
There is also another possible objection to the agreement that Theresa May has arrived; and that involves our human rights. If this agreement is ‘accepted’ then why should we become liable to accept the rulings of another entity when we have no recourse, under representative democracy, of affecting the decisions by which we are forced to live?
Another thought on this Brexit problem: as we all know – and I and others have maintained for yonks – the process of Brexit has been handled by politicians who know not that in which they have involved themselves. They have assumed control of a negotiation on a subject about which they know nothing, with an organisation of whose workings and raison d’etre they also know nothing.
I have, to repeat the gist of other articles, maintained almost since I first began blogging, that representative democracy is but a form of democratised dictatorship and Brexit illustrates this completely. Brexit, through representative democracy, demonstrates that yet again we are to have a policy with which the majority do not agree (if recent opinion polls are to be believed) yet is one that is about to be imposed upon us.
Consider: those who are able, under representative democracy, to decide how we are to live, think and act – come a general election – will no doubt get re-elected. Is it not about time that our system of democracy was changed? Is it not time that the ‘servant’/’master’ relationship was ‘cemented’. Has the time not arrived wherein we, the people, must take an interest in that which is imposed on us, especially where Brexit is concerned?
Sir Ivan Rogers spoke about about Brexit being a ‘revolution’. Is it not time that we , the people, began that revolution for the sake of democracy per se?
If that means the army on the streets post Brexit and ‘heads on pikes’, as far as I am concerned, so be it!